Article

Artificial Intelligence in Automated Detection of

Disinformation: A Thematic Analysis
Fátima C. Carrilho Santos

LabCom, University of Beira Interior, 6201-001 Covilhã, Portugal; [email protected]

Abstract: The increasing prevalence of disinformation has led to a growing interest in leveraging
artificial intelligence (AI) for detecting and combating this phenomenon. This article presents a
thematic analysis of the potential benefits of automated disinformation detection from the perspective
of information sciences. The analysis covers a range of approaches, including fact checking, linguistic
analysis, sentiment analysis, and the utilization of human-in-the-loop systems. Furthermore, the
article explores how the combination of blockchain and AI technologies can be used to automate the
process of disinformation detection. Ultimately, the article aims to consider the integration of AI into
journalism and emphasizes the importance of ongoing collaboration between these fields to effectively
combat the spread of disinformation. The article also addresses ethical considerations related to the
use of AI in journalism, including concerns about privacy, transparency, and accountability.

Keywords: disinformation; artificial intelligence (AI); automatized detection; journalism

1. Introduction
The era of smartphones and social media has revolutionized the way content is
transmitted and received, but not all of this content is accurate or truthful. The widespread
use of the Internet and social media platforms has led to a significant increase in the
prevalence of misleading information, known as disinformation. It is easily accessible and
Citation: Santos, Fátima C. Carrilho. spreads rapidly in these digital environments.
2023. Artificial Intelligence in In this article, we consider the definition of disinformation from the European Com-
Automated Detection of mission: “false, inaccurate, or misleading information designed, presented and promoted
Disinformation: A Thematic Analysis. to intentionally cause public harm or for profit” (De Cock Buning 2018, p. 10). Disinforma-
Journalism and Media 4: 679–687. tion, disguised as factual information, creates a distorted understanding of reality, leading
https://doi.org/10.3390/ to severe consequences for society by distorting people’s perceptions of various issues.
journalmedia4020043 Political and health matters are particularly vulnerable to disinformation, as seen during
Academic Editors: Rashid Mehmood
the COVID-19 pandemic, during which false information spread rapidly through social
and João Canavilhas media. However, disinformation can affect various areas by disseminating false knowledge
about reality.
Received: 7 March 2023 Although the phenomenon of disinformation gained significant attention during the
Revised: 25 May 2023 2016 US election campaigns, it has taken on a new dimension since 2020. The COVID-19
Accepted: 25 May 2023
pandemic highlighted the critical importance of reliable and fact-based information for
Published: 3 June 2023
decision-making across all aspects of society, emphasizing its role as a fundamental pillar
of democracy (Grizzle et al. 2021).
Disinformation not only poses challenges to discerning truthful information but also
Copyright: © 2023 by the author.
undermines journalistic credibility. It represents a significant obstacle to journalism as a
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. means of knowledge production in society. Technological advancements, especially in
This article is an open access article artificial intelligence (AI), have not only increased the spread of disinformation but have
distributed under the terms and also facilitated its automated creation and distribution. Consequently, the use of AI in
conditions of the Creative Commons disinformation creation and dissemination poses a significant challenge to the reliability of
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// information, making it increasingly difficult to distinguish between facts and falsehoods.
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ AI can be defined as the process of automating tasks that typically require human
4.0/). intelligence. In other words, it involves replicating diverse facets of human thinking and

Journal. Media 2023, 4, 679–687. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia4020043 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/journalmedia

Journal. Media 2023, 4 680

behavior (Russell and Norvig (2013). However, Bostrom (2018) emphasized that the most
significant challenge for AI lies in attaining this behavior when performing tasks that
necessitate common sense and comprehension of natural language, areas in which humans
instinctively excel without conscious effort.
AI systems strive to replicate human-like reasoning, learning, planning, creativity,
and numerous other capabilities. Algorithms, which comprise sequences of instructions or
operations, are crafted to accomplish specific objectives. Present endeavors in the devel-
opment of systems to identify misleading language in disinformation have emphasized
automatic classification techniques and a range of algorithms (Bhutani et al. 2019).
One notable subfield of AI is machine learning, which enables computers to au-
tonomously identify patterns in extensive datasets through algorithms without the need for
explicit programming. Machine learning plays a vital role in tasks that require machines to
learn from experience (Oliveira 2018). Consequently, it focuses on creating algorithms and
procedures to enhance computers’ performance in executing activities.
Furthermore, while AI can be used to amplify disinformation, it also plays a crucial
role in identifying disinformation. According to Singh et al. (2021), advancements in
this domain involve multimodal automated detection, which incorporates both textual
and visual cues to identify disinformation. Various machine learning and classification
algorithms have been employed to assign categories to specific datasets based on their
characteristics.
Efforts have been consistently made to develop machine learning-based systems and
natural language processing (NLP) algorithms for disinformation detection. However,
thus far, there have been no flawless solutions. NLP, a subfield of AI, enables machines to
comprehend, interpret, and replicate human language.
One challenge associated with utilizing AI and machine learning for disinformation
detection constitutes ethical concerns. Biases and prejudices can infiltrate these systems,
leading to erroneous outcomes. Moreover, ethical considerations pose obstacles to the use
of AI in journalism, including the lack of monitoring and transparency and the potential
suppression of creativity. Nevertheless, as stated by Jamil (2021), AI has been widely
employed in journalism to automate repetitive tasks, particularly in data collection and
identifying relevant patterns and trends for news reporting.
While this article examines different approaches to leverage AI in combating dis-
information, the main focus is on automated fact-checking, which has been supported
by existing research, such as Graves and Cherubini (2016) and Kertysova (2018). As we
delve into the subsequent section on the intersection of AI and blockchain technologies,
automated fact-checking, especially when combined with these two technologies, can
encompass the three key stages of traditional fact-checking: identification, verification,
and distribution (Graves 2018; Nakov et al. 2021). While other sections discuss different
approaches, they can be integrated into an automated fact-checking system. However, a
separate approach was chosen since automated fact-checking does not necessarily require
the inclusion of all the other alternatives described.

2. Methods and Experimental Results

The objective of this study was to synthesize the current possibilities of using AI to
combat disinformation. Disinformation is currently a growing problem, and it is increas-
ingly important to understand how we can utilize AI to help address this issue.
Thematic analysis was chosen as the methodology for this study to provide a contex-
tual understanding of the topic from the perspective of information sciences, distinguishing
it from the more prevalent approaches in the literature, which often focus on specialized
areas, such as computer engineering.
Thematic analysis, as a qualitative approach, allows for a comprehensive understand-
ing of the potential of a given issue by gathering diverse aspects and data, and it facilitates
the exploration of relationships between different concepts and interpretations (Alhojailan
2012). Therefore, our objective is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current
Journal. Media 2023, 4 681

state of the research regarding the utilization of AI to combat disinformation using this
methodology.
To collect relevant material about the topic under investigation, we initially selected
multiple databases, including Web of Science, Google Scholar, and IEEE Xplore. We
specifically included IEEE Xplore to comprehend the current literature in the field of
computer science, although our review primarily focused on collecting studies from the
perspective of the social sciences.
To search for material related to the explored topic, we utilized keywords, such as
“artificial intelligence” and “disinformation”. However, due to the variety of terms used to
refer to what is understood as disinformation in this context, we also included keywords
such as “fake news” and “misinformation”. The collected material covered the period
between 2012 and 2023, prioritizing recent studies and research articles, while also including
relevant book chapters.
Subsequently, we selected the most relevant material for the topic under study, partic-
ularly contextual approaches that provided a better understanding of the subject from the
perspective of the social sciences. The data analysis was conducted systematically, involv-
ing the cross-referencing of ideas from various authors on specific subtopics within the main
theme and employing cross-validation methods to ensure the accuracy and consistency of
the information.
Employing thematic analysis, we conducted a literature review to identify key issues
related to this topic, exploring the current possibilities of utilizing AI in combating disinfor-
mation. These possibilities include automated fact-checking systems, which may or may
not incorporate automated sentiment analysis and which often involve automated text
analysis. Additionally, we observed that the literature frequently mentions the convergence
between automated systems and human knowledge in the verification process, as well as
the combination of blockchain technology and AI.

3. Automated Fact-Checking for Disinformation Detection

In the context of disinformation, fact-checking refers to the process of verifying infor-
mation to confirm the accuracy of fact-based statements. Fact-checking has always been
part of the journalistic production routine, but with the rise of disinformation, journalists
have taken on an even greater responsibility in deepening the practice of information
verification. Consequently, various fact-checking agencies have emerged, with some linked
to existing newsrooms and others operating independently in the market.
Since the 2000s, the number of projects related to fact-checking has continued to
increase. According to Cazetta (2018), interest was sparked with the launch in 2003 of
Factcheck.org, created by the journalist Brooks Jackson in the United States, with a focus
on verifying statements made by public figures. Rosenstiel, in his book The New Ethics of
Journalism: Principles for the 21st Century Rosenstiel (2013), argued that the fact-checking
movement originated after the 1988 US election, when a Washington Post columnist, David
Broder, classified candidates’ statements in debates as “lies,” “disqualified,” and “dema-
gogic,” among other adjectives.
Some authors have also asserted that the initiative began in 1982, during the term of
US President Ronald Reagan, when American journalists started to challenge inaccurate
statements made by the president during press conferences (Cazetta 2018). However, in
this case, it was primarily a contestation of a politician’s statements and did not follow a
structured methodology, unlike current fact-checking practices.
The proliferation of disinformation driven by the digital context has significantly
boosted fact-checking efforts (do Nascimento 2021). In response, fact-checking projects
aim to restore the credibility of journalism by exposing errors and incorrect information
circulating on social media or in public figures’ speeches. As Spinelli and Santos (2018)
noted, what renders fact-checking a significant practice for journalism in the post-truth era
is its emphasis on transparency and credibility.
Journal. Media 2023, 4 682

Canavilhas and Ferrari (2018) pointed out that several renowned newspapers, such
as the Washington Post, the New York Times, and Le Monde, have invested in these fact-
checking formats, with the Americas and Europe being the continents with the most
fact-checkers. Graves and Cherubini’s study (2016) highlighted the growth of fact-checking
sites throughout Europe, albeit with varying organizational forms and orientations, but
with a shared commitment to publicly evaluate claims made by powerful actors, such as
politicians, and in some cases information disseminated by the media.
Despite the growing interest in establishing fact-checking initiatives, it is noteworthy
that the consumption of information generated by fact-checking agencies is often restricted
to a specific audience, primarily journalists who rely on these verifications to validate their
texts (do Nascimento 2021). According to Barrera et al. (2020), who studied the impact of
content produced by fact-checking agencies compared to politicians’ propaganda, there
has been an absence of reaction from voters to fact-checking.
Experts and fact-checking organizations face the daunting task of investigating a vast
amount of content, and AI has further intensified this workload, particularly due to the
proliferation of bots deliberately generating and disseminating disinformation (Demartini
et al. 2020). Due to several constraints surrounding fact-checking, such as time and resource
limitations, new methods of fact-checking have been proposed, mainly based on the
automatic detection of fake news. Thus, Jiang et al. (2021) argued that automated tools for
detecting fake news, such as machine learning and specifically a type of machine learning
algorithm, deep learning models, have become an essential requirement.
According to Kertysova’s (2018) study, the initial proposals for automating online
fact-checking emerged approximately a decade ago. However, the interest in research and
investigation around AI-assisted fact-checking was triggered by Donald Trump’s election
as President of the United States, due to the large volume of erroneous information that was
propagated: “The last few years have seen a wave of additional funding being earmarked
for automated fact-checking initiatives that would help practitioners identify, verify, and
correct social media content” (Kertysova 2018, p. 3).
One of the first challenges that had to be overcome initially in automated fact-checking
was the lack of data to train the models. In 2017, online repositories with large volumes of
information began to appear due to the growth of fact-checking sites. At the beginning of
these developments, a database consisting of 106 fact checks from Politifact, one of the main
fact-checking sites in the United States, was founded. Thus, a significant leap occurred in
mid-2017 with the collection of a corpus of 12,800 checks from Politifact, and since then,
the volume of databases has grown (García-Marín et al. 2022).
While creating extensive information repositories has been a significant challenge in
AI-assisted fact-checking, ensuring data quality is equally crucial for designing effective
algorithmic solutions to combat disinformation. Torabi Asr and Taboada (2019) argued that
databases should be composed of samples of both false and true information in a balanced
distribution across a range of topics. In a 2019 study, they reviewed available databases
and presented a new repository called MisInfoText.
The primary objective of contemporary fact-checking endeavors is to ascertain the
accuracy of information disseminated through social media channels (García-Marín et al.
2022). AI can automate the fact-checking process, especially through machine learning,
NLP, and other sub-areas of AI.
There are also other automated alternatives for detecting disinformation, which can
be part of fact-checking systems or exist individually. These alternatives include analyzing
and verifying sources of information, cross-checking information, reviewing evidence, and
more. Monitoring social media using AI-based recommendation systems, for example, can
also be crucial in mitigating the spread of disinformation.

4. Detection of Disinformation through Language Analysis

Automated fact-checking can include text analysis performed by AI, which is useful
in classifying news as true or false. In these cases, in addition to resources based on word
Journal. Media 2023, 4 683

occurrences and word relationships (both semantic and syntactic), it is also necessary
to have resources based on how humans perform fact-checking. That is, the automated
classification of information examines human behavior in the process of manually detecting
disinformation (Školkay and Filin 2019).
In fact-checking conducted by humans, contextual factors are considered, including
the historical background, individuals involved, locations, and other relevant specifics
related to the event. Thus, when automated detection of disinformation includes these
characteristics, it is closer to human accuracy.
According to Kertysova (2018), automated technologies have limitations in evaluating
individual statements. Current AI systems excel at identifying simple statements and
assertions, but they struggle with more complex ones. The same limitation applies to
expressions, in which context and culture are necessary.
Despite significant advancements in NLP techniques for automated text analysis,
challenges remain in understanding fundamental human concepts, such as sarcasm or
irony. AI-based systems currently struggle to address disinformation that relies on subtler
forms of expression beyond explicit content. Additionally, linguistic barriers and specific
cultural/political environments in each country pose even greater challenges.
A common approach to managing these challenges is to involve humans in the text
analysis process, especially when regarding machine learning algorithm training (Školkay
and Filin 2019). For example, in a fake news classification project, humans can flag a news
story as false or true in the first phase. Then, the program can learn from these indications
to assign characteristics and make classification decisions based on patterns identified in
the news.
This approach, referred to as semi-supervised learning, offers the potential to enhance
the accuracy of automated text analysis by combining the human ability to comprehend
language nuances with the efficiency and scalability of automated text processing.
In machine learning systems, data representation greatly affects the accuracy of results,
and the content shared by social media users being generally in unstructured forms makes
this process difficult. Therefore, unstructured data extracted from social networks need to
undergo transformation into a structured format using text mining methods. The problem
of text mining can be defined as the extraction of meaningful, useful, and previously
unknown information from textual data.

5. Detection of Disinformation through Sentiment Analysis

Sentiment analysis is a natural language processing technique that can also be used to
detect disinformation. Although AI is not infallible, especially in the context of sentiment
analysis, there have been significant improvements in this field because emotional appeal
in fake news content differs from that in true news since messages with a strong emotional
appeal can influence how content is consumed, processed, and shared by consumers
(Paschen 2019). In fake news, the body of the news is usually more focused on specific
negative emotions, such as disgust and anger, and less on positive emotions, such as joy.
In the study by Alonso et al. (2021), sentiment analysis (SA) was defined as a branch of
Natural Language Processing (NLP), which is responsible for designing and implementing
models, methods, and techniques to determine whether a text is composed of objective or
subjective information and, in the latter case, to determine whether such information is
expressed positively, neutrally, or negatively, as well as whether it is expressed strongly
or weakly.
Computational techniques identify the characteristics of sentiments referred to as
polarity, allowing for the classification of sentiments as positive, negative, or neutral. These
techniques also identify specific emotions, such as sadness, anger, and more. While these
computational techniques are applied to analyze text and images in news or content, their
usage has been relatively limited in certain languages, such as Portuguese (Maia et al. 2021).
By analyzing the sentiment associated with news or content and determining whether
there is emotional polarization, indications can be identified that the content is false; thus,
Journal. Media 2023, 4 684

sentiment analysis can be a useful tool for detecting fake news, especially in automated
fake news detection. Therefore, sentiment analysis, while it can exist independently, is also
a tool that can be part of the automated fact-checking process.
Given that a majority of the subjective content shared by users on social media revolves
around opinions, sentiment analysis is also referred to as Opinion Mining, as noted by
Alonso et al. (2021). Shu et al. (2017) reported that SA should play a role in determining
resource allocation based on posts since people express their emotions or opinions about
fake news through social media posts, such as skeptical opinions or sensational reactions.
Alonso et al. (2021) also referred to sentiment as one of the resources that can be extracted
from text for fake news detection since conflicting sentiments between news disseminators
can indicate a high probability of fake news.

6. Using Human-in-the-Loop AI Systems for Detecting Disinformation

As discussed throughout this article, considering the limitations of both AI and hu-
mans, it can be argued that combining the efforts of humans and AI is advantageous
in combating disinformation. As Demartini et al. (2020) argued, human-in-the-loop AI
(HAI) systems combine the best of both worlds, with humans filtering what will be im-
plemented in practice by a machine that performs tasks based on databases and machine
learning algorithms.
This model aims to harness AI’s capability for large-scale processing, while utilizing
human intelligence for complex tasks beyond AI’s reach, such as language understanding
and ensuring fairness and applicability within the system. One significant advantage of
AI-based systems is their capacity to comprehensively analyze vast amounts of content,
surpassing human capabilities (Babakar and Moy 2016).
Nevertheless, HAI systems encounter further challenges in achieving optimal func-
tionality and generating valid results, including the inconsistency of data quality due to
variations among participants involved in training the AI system. For example, using
crowdsourcing, i.e., collective intelligence gathered in a complex task, to collect “labels”
from online people using a platform is different from relying on experts.
Despite this limitation, since the number of available experts is usually limited, to
obtain high-volume and quality labels, effective quality control mechanisms for crowdsourc-
ing need to be developed. Another challenge that comes with HAI systems is the bias that
contributing humans can create and/or amplify in the annotated data and, consequently,
in the models learned with these labeled data (prejudices and stereotypes of contributing
individuals can be reflected in the generated labels). As highlighted by Ghafourifar et al.
(2021), if we aspire to create a potent and intelligent AI-based tool capable of detecting
fake news, we must address our own biases and practice skepticism when it comes to
consuming, sharing, and creating content on social media platforms and the Internet.
It is necessary to avoid biased models while leveraging human resources and filling in
their gaps to better harness the scalability of AI-based methods and ob7tain the best of both
worlds. Kertysova (2018) presented an opposite concept to human-in-the-loop AI, involving
a different degree of human involvement in the decision-making process of an AI system,
called humans “out of the loop” of AI systems. This approach is more common in systems
that have been trained with a large volume of data and use sophisticated algorithms to
make decisions, operating completely without direct human intervention.
Regarding humans being “out of the loop,” the author noted that there are legal
reasons why humans need to be kept informed about content moderation. According
to a recent study funded by the European Science-Media Hub, limiting the automated
enforcement of decisions about problems uncovered by AI is essential to ensure human
agency and natural justice, including the right to appeal. This right does not prevent the
suspension of bot accounts at scale, but it ensures proper auditing of the implemented
system processes:
“The European data protection framework—which includes the General Data Protec-
tion Regulation (GDPR)—allows people to know how organizations are using their data as
Journal. Media 2023, 4 685

well as to contest certain decisions made by algorithms. Because developers cannot explain
how algorithms produce certain outcomes (see previous section), complaints relating to the
GDPR have already been lodged, several organizations have been sanctioned, and more
cases are expected to follow” (Kertysova 2018, p. 69).

7. The Application of AI Blockchain in the Automated Detection of Disinformation

In addition to AI, another technology that has been extensively discussed in the litera-
ture and could be useful in combating disinformation, especially when used in conjunction
with AI, is blockchain.
Blockchain technology has been utilized for information validation and news aggre-
gation. It is a decentralized record-keeping technology that allows for secure storage and
validation of transactions to ensure that they cannot be altered. This technology, which
is often used to create virtual currencies, can be leveraged to preserve and verify the in-
tegrity of news and other online content (Qayyum et al. 2019). Additionally, the authors
concluded that blockchain technology, being a decentralized technology, promises to bring
transparency and trust to journalism.
As do Val et al. (2021) explained, blockchain technology represents an alternative
for verifying the content circulating on the Internet because, through it, users sign digital
documents that are validated as true regarding a particular subject.
Therefore, technology tools based on blockchain can identify and compare false infor-
mation with real facts. Several initiatives already employ blockchain to combat disinforma-
tion, including the News Provenance Project, Fake Check, and Democracy Notary. The New
York Times also conducted a project to provide provenance metadata around news using
blockchain technology to track the dissemination of news online and provide contextual
information to news readers. There was also an effort to create initiatives around COVID-19,
such as Hashlog.
The combination of AI and blockchain could lead to the creation of platforms with
fewer limitations. Blockchain ensures secure and immutable data storage, while AI pro-
cesses and analyzes large amounts of data in real time. One limitation of blockchain is its
performance since it can only handle a limited number of transactions per second.
Thus, blockchain is used to store verified and trustworthy information about news
sources, and AI, in turn, could be used to analyze and classify news in real time, comparing
it with the information stored in the blockchain and identifying fake news.
However, in addition to detecting disinformation circulating on the Internet, Shae and
Tsai (2019) pointed out that it is important to create mechanisms to minimize the impact of
fake news before it is propagated; that is, it is necessary to create algorithms to predict fake
news to anticipate the beginning of fake news propagation before it is actually spread.
This approach could be the most effective mechanism to combat the spread of fake
news in the long run. Therefore, it is important and highly challenging to identify, label,
and categorize different personal characteristics for diverse groups/communities and to
develop corresponding intervention technologies. Personalized intervention technology
can be developed by leveraging the AI-trustworthy news platform in blockchain.
To achieve this goal, some of the challenges include building databases of factual news,
creating a trustworthy news blockchain, developing a blockchain crowdsourcing false
news classification mechanism, developing scalable distributed intelligence contracting the
blockchain network, and establishing a practical business model for building a trustworthy
news ecosystem (Shae and Tsai 2019).
In conclusion, this study discusses a long-term strategy to develop models for predict-
ing fake news before it spreads and to research the effectiveness of personalized intervention
mechanisms. The combination of AI and blockchain technologies, such as in the practice of
fact-checking, encompasses the three stages of fact-checking: identification, verification,
and distribution (Graves 2018; Nakov et al. 2021). Westlund et al. (2022) pointed out that
the identification stage gathers the highest concentration of technologies.
Journal. Media 2023, 4 686

8. Discussion and Conclusions

Since the 2016 US presidential election, there has been growing interest in researching
the use of new technologies, particularly AI, with a focus on automating fact-checking
processes. In mid-2017, online repositories with large volumes of information started to
emerge, effectively addressing the initial challenge of data scarcity for training automated
fact-checking models. However, in addition to data quantity, ensuring the quality of the
data used is crucial for designing effective algorithmic solutions to combat disinformation.
Currently, the main goal of fact-checking efforts is to verify the accuracy of information
disseminated on social media, where AI has proved useful in automating the fact-checking
process, particularly through machine learning, natural language processing, and other
AI subfields.
In addition to automated fact-checking, which may also incorporate language analysis
and sentiment analysis, the fight against disinformation requires a multifaceted approach
that involves not only the use of AI and other technological tools but also human verifi-
cation. Regarding other technologies, although this article primarily focused on artificial
intelligence, it is worth mentioning that the combination of AI and blockchain technologies
leads to a more efficient computer system for combating disinformation. AI can analyze
and classify news in real time by comparing it with information stored on the blockchain,
providing two-factor validation.
Therefore, it is important to acknowledge that automated detection of disinformation
is only a part of the solution and should be complemented by other approaches that
consider the complex nature of disinformation. Moreover, ethical concerns surrounding
the use of AI in detecting disinformation must be addressed, including issues related to
privacy, transparency, and accountability. Any use of AI in detecting disinformation must
be guided by ethical principles and fundamental human values.
Efforts to combat disinformation are crucial for restoring the credibility of journalism,
but a gap still exists between AI and journalistic practices. Although AI has been used to
automate repetitive tasks and collect data for news, there remain ethical challenges and
financial barriers that must be addressed to fully integrate AI into journalism. Hence, it
is crucial to emphasize the importance of responsible implementation and the ongoing
collaboration between technology and journalism.

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.

References
Alhojailan, Mohammed IIbrahim. 2012. Thematic analysis: A critical review of its process and evaluation. West east Journal of Social
Sciences 1: 39–47.
Alonso, Miguel A., David Vilares, Carlos Gómez-Rodríguez, and Jesús Vilares. 2021. Sentiment analysis for fake news detection.
Electronics 10: 1348. [CrossRef]
Babakar, Mevan, and Will Moy. 2016. The State of Automated Factchecking. How to Make Factchecking Dramatically More Effective with
Technology We Have Now. London: Full Fact.
Barrera, Oscar, Sergei Guriev, Emeric Henry, and Ekatarina Zhuravskaya. 2020. Facts, alternative facts, and fact checking in times of
post-truth politics. Journal of Public Economics 182: 104123. [CrossRef]
Bhutani, Bhavika, Neha Rastogi, Priyanshu Sehgal, and Archana Purwar. 2019. Fake News Detection Using Sentiment Analysis. Paper
presented at the 2019 Twelfth International Conference on Contemporary Computing (IC3), Noida, India, August 8–10; pp. 1–5.
Bostrom, Nick. 2018. Superinteligência. Rio de Janeiro: DarkSide Books.
Canavilhas, João, and Pollyana Ferrari. 2018. Fact-checking: O jornalismo regressa às origens. Jornalismo em Tempo de Transformação:
Desafios de Produção e de Ação, 30–49.
Cazetta, Póvoa Cazetta. 2018. O Fact-Checking Luso-Brasileiro: Uma Análise dos Fact-Checkings Credenciados No Brasil e em Portugal pelo
International Fact-Checking Network. Porto: Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto.
Journal. Media 2023, 4 687

do Nascimento, Flávia Lopes Sales. 2021. Entendendo o fact-checking como uma ferramenta para promoção de literacia mediática no
contexto luso brasileiro. E-Revista de Estudos Interculturais, 3. [CrossRef]
do Val, Ronaldo Borges, Thamirys Dias Viana, and Luis Borges Gouveia. 2021. O uso de Blockchain na identificação de Fake News:
Ferramentas de apoio tecnológico para o combate à desinformação. Brazilian Journal of Business 3: 2726–2742. [CrossRef]
De Cock Buning, Madeleine. 2018. A Multi-Dimensional Approach to Disinformation: Report of the Independent High Level Group on Fake
News and Online Disinformation. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Demartini, Gianluca, Stefano Mizzaro, and Damiano Spina. 2020. Human-in-the-loop Artificial Intelligence for Fighting Online
Misinformation: Challenges and Opportunities. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin 43: 65–74.
García-Marín, David, Carlos Elías, and Xosé Soengas-Pérez. 2022. Big data and disinformation: Algorithm mapping for fact checking
and artificial intelligence. In Total Journalism: Models, Techniques and Challenges. Cham: Springer International Publishing,
pp. 123–35.
Ghafourifar, P., M. Dousti, and R. Mirsaeidi. 2021. Fake news detection using a hybrid of deep learning models. Journal of Ambient
Intelligence and Humanized Computing 12: 5841–52.
Graves, Lucas. 2018. Understanding the Promise and Limits of Automated Fact-Checking. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of
Journalism.
Graves, L., and F. Cherubini. 2016. The Rise of Fact-Checking Sites in Europe. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
Grizzle, Alton, Carolyb Wilson, Ramon Tuazon, Chi Kim Cheung, Jesus Lau, Rachel Fischer, Dorothy Gordon, Kwame Akyempong,
Jagtar Singh, Paul R. Carr, and et al. 2021. Media and Information Literate Citizens: Think Critically, Click Wisely! Paris: UNESCO
Publishing.
Jamil, Sadia. 2021. Artificial intelligence and journalistic practice: The crossroads of obstacles and opportunities for the Pakistani
journalists. Journalism Practice 15: 1400–22. [CrossRef]
Jiang, Tao, Jian Ping Li, Amin Ul Haq, Abdus Saboor, and Amjad Ali. 2021. A novel stacking approach for accurate detection of fake
news. IEEE Access 9: 22626–39. [CrossRef]
Kertysova, Katarina. 2018. Artificial intelligence and disinformation: How AI changes the way disinformation is produced, dissemi-
nated, and can be countered. Security and Human Rights 29: 55–81. [CrossRef]
Maia, Igor Maffei Libonati, Marcelo Pereira de Souza, Flávio Roberto Matias da Silva, Paulo Márcio Souza Freire, and Ronaldo Ribeiro
Goldschmidt. 2021. A sentiment-based multimodal method to detect fake news. Paper presented at the Brazilian Symposium on
Multimedia and the Web, WebMedia 21: Brazilian Symposium on Multimedia and the Web, Belo Horizonte, Brazil, November
5–12; pp. 213–16.
Nakov, Preslav, David Corney, Maram Hasanain, Firoj Alam, Tamer Elsayed, Alberto Barrón-Cedeño, Paolo Papotti, Shaden Shaar, and
Giovanni Da San Martino. 2021. Automated fact-checking for assisting human fact-checkers. arXiv arXiv:2103.07769.
Oliveira, Arlindo. 2018. Mentes Digitais, 2nd ed. Lisboa: IST Press.
Paschen, Jeannette. 2019. Investigating the emotional appeal of fake news using artificial intelligence and human contributions. Journal
of Product & Brand Management 29: 223–33.
Qayyum, Adnan, Junaid Qadir, Muhammad Umar Janjua, and Falak Sher. 2019. Using blockchain to rein in the new post-truth world
and check the spread of fake news. IT Professional 21: 16–24. [CrossRef]
Rosenstiel, Tom. 2013. The New Ethics of Journalism: Principles for the 21st Century. Thousand Oaks: CQ Press.
Russell, Stuart, and Peter Norvig. 2013. “Parte I: Inteligência Artificial”. Em Inteligência Artificial. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier, pp. 22–60.
Shae, Zonyin, and J. Tsai. 2019. AI blockchain platform for trusting news. Paper presented at the 2019 IEEE 39th International
Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), Dallas, TX, USA, July 7–10; pp. 1610–19.
Shu, Kai, Amy Sliva, Suhang Wang, Jiliang Tang, and Huan Liu. 2017. Fake News Detection on Social Media: A Data Mining
Perspective. SIGKDD Explorations 19: 22–36. [CrossRef]
Singh, Vivek K., Isha Ghosh, and Darshan Sonagara. 2021. Detecting fake news stories via multimodal analysis. Journal of the Association
for Information Science and Technology 72: 3–17. [CrossRef]
Spinelli, Egle Müller, and Jéssica de Almeida Santos. 2018. Jornalismo na era da pós-verdade: Fact-checking como ferramenta de
combate às fake news. Revista Observatório 4: 759–82. [CrossRef]
Školkay, Andrej, and Juraj Filin. 2019. A comparison of fake news detecting and fact-checking AI based solutions. Studia Medioznawcze
4: 365–83. [CrossRef]
Torabi Asr, Fatemeh, and Maite Taboada. 2019. Big Data and quality data for fake news and misinformation detection. Big Data &
Society 6: 2053951719843310.
Westlund, Oscar, Rebekah Larsen, Lucas Graves, Lasha Kavtaradze, and Steen Steensen. 2022. Technologies and Fact-Checking: A
Sociotechnical Mapping. In Disinformation Studies. Covilhã: Beira Interior University, p. 193.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.